On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 2:45 PM, Leonardo Uribe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> Leonardo Uribe schrieb: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I was running the needed tasks to get the 1.1.8 release of Apache >> > MyFaces Tomahawk out. >> >> Some initial test results: >> >> The tomahawk-1.1.8 jar works well with Facelets + Mojarra1.2.0_09 + >> java1.6. >> >> For the "staging repo" files deployed here: >> >> http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/tomahawk118<http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/tomahawk118> >> <http://people.apache.org/%7Elu4242/tomahawk118> >> The binary jar license, manifest all look ok. >> Checksums all look ok. >> >> Oddly, the NOTICE file in the binary jarfile has nothing but the >> standard ASF claim. However the NOTICE in the source jar has a lot more >> credits in it. Looks like the NOTICE in the binary file could be wrong... >> >> And on both NOTICE files, it says "copyright 2004-2007" which should >> probably be updated. >> >> > That's strange but true, the notice should be the same for all. I'll take a > look. > > The problem was a override when unpacking shared tomahawk sources. This was fixed and updated the part of copyright to "copyright 2004-2008". The new artifacts will be generated after the question about optional dependency to commons is solved. > >> I'm not convinced about this change to the tomahawk pom: >> >> <!-- Transitive dependency from commons-fileupload. >> in 1.2 it was declared optional, but t:inputFileUpload >> uses it indirectly, so it is necessary to include it >> in our pom as runtime dependency --> >> <dependency> >> <groupId>commons-io</groupId> >> <artifactId>commons-io</artifactId> >> <version>1.3.2</version> >> <scope>runtime</scope> >> </dependency> >> >> I think that this should indeed be an optional dependency; if someone >> wants to use Tomahawk but not use the t:inputFileUpload, then why should >> we force commons-io to be included in their classpath? >> > > This change was introduced on 1.1.7, since from commons-io 1.2, this > library was marked as optional. From other point of view if someone does not > want commons-io to be included in their classpath he/she can exclude it. > Good question. In my opinion one or other it is the same (read it as +0 > taking the + to let it as is), but I prefer add to the classpath by default > because if not, every user of t:inputFileUpload must add this dependency by > hand. It could be good to have a community point of view about it. > In my opinion, it is more easier use this for exclude commons-io dependency: <dependency> <groupId>org.apache.myfaces.tomahawk</groupId> <artifactId>tomahawk</artifactId> <version>1.1.8</version> <exclusions> <exclusion> <groupId>commons-io</groupId> <artifactId>commons-io</artifactId> </exclusion> </exclusions> </dependency> In the other case, you need to find the proper version of commons-io (requires that users check tomahawk 1.1.8 pom) and add it as dependency if the user wants to use t:inputFileUpload. > > regards > > Leonardo Uribe > > >> >> Regards, >> Simon >> >> -- >> -- Emails in "mixed" posting style will be ignored >> -- (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style) >> >> >
